With the upper house election just around the corner, now is the opportune time to discuss in earnest whether or not the present Japanese constitution should be revised. This has been a lingering homework assignment for post-war Japanese over the years, with the answer long over-due. Hasn’t the whole of Japan, including political parties and their candidates, as well as the mass media, been shying away from squarely grappling with this issue?
　　　　　［Editor’s note: The Japanese constitution was drawn up by the General Headquarters of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers shortly after the US occupied Japan in August of 1945, coming into effect on May 3, 1947. It is also known as the “peace” constitution, as Japan forever renounced war under Article 9. A revision of the constitution, advocated by the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) administration of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, is a focal point of the upcoming election.］
　　　　　Without question, the crucial issue in the election is a comprehensive revision of the constitution. Japan at this juncture finds itself in a tough international situation in which, without being able to revise the constitution, it appears unable to sustain itself as an independent democracy. Specifically, Japan is faced with two harsh realities of international geopolitics today that every thinking Japanese must come to terms with. On the one hand, China is vigorously stepping up its military buildup, strongly determined to dominate the Asia-Pacific region, including Japan. On the other hand, in sharp contrast, the US has steadily become increasingly inward-looking in recent years, making it more and more difficult for those of us in the Asia-Pacific to continue to depend on the US to maintain peace and stability in the region. If one understands this scenario, it then becomes possible to come to grips with the seriousness of the situation confronting Japan today. Under such circumstances, Japan can only turn to its own strength in order to safeguard itself and its people.
　　　　　It is exactly for this reason that a revision of the constitution is needed. It would be virtually impossible for Japan to defend itself on its own so long as its current constitution is in effect. In revising the current constitution, we must seriously consider what kind of constitution Japan should equip itself with, and what type of country Japan wants to be. The election this weekend will be an important opportunity for all responsible Japanese to express their readiness to support the proposed revision by going to the polls.
　　　　　But election results alone won’t do Japan much good unless vigorous post-election discussions are held across the nation to determine what such a revised constitution should look like. Several drafts of a new constitution have already been publicized that can be reliably used as reference, including those prepared by the LDP, the Japan Junior Chamber of Commerce, and two conservative mass-circulation dailies – the Yomiuri Shimbun, and the Sankei Shimbun. I would rate the “People’s Constitution” by the latter over others, because it strikes me as the most “Japanese” of them all in that it attaches great importance to the history, culture, and values of Japan.

Starting Point: Hatred and Disdain of Japan

　　　　　Incidentally, Emeritus Professor Tadae Takubo of Kyorin University in Tokyo, who heads the “People’s Constitution” drafting committee, is Deputy Director of the Japan Institute for National Fundamentals (JINF), a privately financed think tank headquartered in Tokyo which I head. In addition to Prof. Takubo, the committee is made up of four other specialists, three of whom are also JINF directors – Emeritus Professors Osamu Nishi of Komazawa University and Yasuo Ohara of Kokugakuin University, and Professor Akira Momochi of Nihon University.
　　　　　At the outset of the “People’s Constitution” drafted by these experts, Prof. Takubo stresses the need for a constitutional revision: “The only way to describe my sentiments towards the existing constitution is a deep sense of humiliation for having our history, tradition, and culture destroyed.”
　　　　　Certainly a deeply penetrating statement. The defeat of Japan in the Pacific War was followed by the occupation, during which the Americans introduced a system of laws and brought drastic changes to Japan’s constitution, its education system, the official position of the Shinto religion, and many other aspects of the society. It would only be natural for most Japanese to feel profoundly mortified to think back over what happened to Japan during this period.
　　　　　Prof. Takubo asserts that there is “absolutely nothing Japanese” about the existing constitution, particularly as regards its preamble. It can be safely said that the American occupiers who wrote the constitution had no intention whatsoever of coming up with a constitution that truly represented the interest of the Japanese. That, I believe, is why there is nothing Japanese about the constitution, which represents the supreme law providing the foundation of decision-making that affects every aspect of the people’s lives.
　　　　　In place of Japan’s tradition and culture, the occupiers improvised a constitution based on several documents created at the time of the founding of the United States. There is a world of difference in the national characteristics of Japan and the US. The former is a nation that has traditionally had at its head an emperor, whose main function since the ancient times of Shinto mythology has been to pray for the wellbeing of the country and its people. On the other hand, the US is a nation that achieved independence after fighting a war over high taxation levied by Great Britain. Simply put, the post-war Japanese constitution is a patchwork of alien concepts taken from various historical American documents and forced on the Japanese people. Therefore, one should not be surprised to realize that this constitution with such a background hardly reflects any inkling of respect for, or understanding of, the profound history of our nation.
　　　　　The constitution hardly offers anything beneficial to the Japanese, as it fundamentally originates from a hatred and disdain of the defeated on the part of the victors. The “People’s Constitution” sums up representative examples of such disadvantages in Chapter 1, entitled: “The Present Constitution Cannot Protect the People.” I suggest that those favoring the present constitution read this chapter. If representatives of any political party still wish to safeguard the existing constitution, then they have a political duty to explain their reasons to the people. I say this because common sense dictates that there is absolutely no way the current constitution can satisfactorily protect our country and its people.
　　　　　Allow me to site from Chapter 1 concrete cases of what absurd consequences have been brought about by the constitution and the spirit behind it:
　　　　　・Tokyo University has long applied restrictions on itself in developing advanced industrial robots. As a result, the university was unable to provide robots badly needed to operate within the dangerously contaminated interiors of nuclear reactor buildings damaged by the tsunami in Fukushima in 2011. Why? The drafters blame a “military allergy” which they assert resulted because the constitution is completely devoid of any references to the need to have “national defense awareness” on the part of the people.
　　　　　・“The Japanese government was functionally incapable of coping with the March 2011 disaster. The reason: the constitution lacks an emergency clause, despite the fact that the Japanese archipelago has historically been disaster-prone.”;
　　　　　・”Japan is incapable of defending itself from cyber attacks right in the middle of the cyber age of the 21st century. Because it is obliged to commit itself to strictly defensive national security under the spirit of the post-war constitution, Japan is prohibited from taking military action unless being attacked first. In cyber wars, the results are always overwhelmingly advantageous to the side that strikes first. Therefore, lament experts, it is impossible for Japan to protect itself against cyber attacks.”; and,
　　　　　・“The irony in Japan is such that the more we protect the existing constitution, the less it will protest our country and its people.”

The Emperor as Chief Supplicant

　　　　　Chapter 2 of the “People’s Constitution” deserves equal attention. Its title: “‘Article 9’ Makes People Unhappy.” It hits the nail on the head. I would strongly urge the reader to study this chapter. It then introduces a deeply touching preamble with this beginning:
　　　　　“Japan is a constitutional state with an ancient history and traditions handed down from our forefathers. The empeor is the foundation of our nation.” This opening paragraph befits Japan as it is the only nation in the world that has had a line of emperors at its head whose main function is to pray for the wellbeing of the people in the same way as his predecessors have since ancient times. The preamble continues:
　　　　　“Ever since the founding of our nation, the Japanese people have continued to turn to the emperor for national unity, valued consensus over dogma, and endeavored to form a majestic modern state. Blessed with beautiful land abundant in nature, Japan has developed its unique culture as an oceanic nation. We strive for all the world’s oceans to be joined in peace, nurturing a spirit to treasure harmony among nations as well as the courage with which to cope with national crises.”
　　　　　This 600-letter preamble is succinctly elegant in the Japanese sense of the word.
　　　　　As humans have personal traits, so nations have national characteristics. The differences between Japan and Korea ― or between Japan and China for that matter – boil down to the differences in their respective histories and cultures, i.e., national characters. The same theory applies to the differences between Japan and the US. Japan must secure a sound and stable future for itself by first rediscovering and treasuring its national character. Thinking along these lines will enable one to come to grips with the importance of revising the constitution at an early stage. With that in mind, it is eagerly hoped that the outcome of the upcoming election will solidly contribute to a bright future for our nation.

(Translated from “Renaissance Japan” column no. 567 in the July 27, 2013 issue of The Weekly Shincho)